The Atlas Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts

[© tweed]

$250k salary isn't rich. Just a highly paid worker.

that was a prescient insight, not absurd, ignorant, or bad.

[© tweed]

Socialist technocrats believed that they could deduce all of economic behavior down to a single formula that rested primarily on government spending.

Somehow I doubt that any serious theorist on the left has ever done this.

Well you doubted wrong! To the extent that the politicians just listened to those people instead of were those people is a different matter. But it is in fact true.

could you name one instance of these socialist technocrats and their single formula and etc.?  because it sounds awesome to me.  reminds me of the last paragraph or so of Part I of Brothers Karamazov, where Father Paissy tells Alyosha that scientists have only studied the parts but ignored the whole..

[© tweed]

the Economics board is not a subforum, Wonkish1.

[© tweed]

It's interesting how it has become socially acceptable to make such jokes in recent years.

the anonymity or cloak-form of the internet allows for refuge in the more sullied piles of humor.

[© tweed]

No because outside of the party, there is the real world where not everything is based on or revolves around government. I'm sick of hearing how government experience is a plus. Run the government and the country like a successful business and we'll do fine. Forget the leftwing talking points and just balance the budget and cut taxes even if it means cutting a few services. Unfortunately since FDR we've had the mentality on the left about how having government services is important but it has been overstated in order to make people dependent on the democratic party. Obama doesn't understand economic, have a clue how supply and demand works, and has never held a job in his life. Now he wants to tell my doctor what's what? This is the kind of thing that happens when you don't treat our government and budget like a business. If a business goes under from bad decision making, so should the ruling class or in this case democrats.

Sick of this troll's rhetoric.

no, it's a positive development -- it's important to understand how significant slices of the population think.

[© tweed]

I'm not one to celebrate a casualty of the police state here, but this I just cannot help.

Ban one more person and higher authorities will be involved.

[© tweed]

This is getting too gross.

I. Am. Not. Voting. For. Anti-Semitic. Parties.
(Except BNP and FN, other stuff compensates it)

that display name lol

[© tweed]

BRTD name-drops postmodernism for the first time?

[© tweed]

This rather belongs in the Utterly Sickening Posts Sh*tmine, but for the lack of such thread I got to post it there.

The first two were positive events.

Click for context.

While nothing will cause lefties to spaz out more than suggesting Allende/the Spanish Republicans/Sandinistas were worse than their opposition (why only things happening in Spanish-speaking countries cause spaz-out reactions I don't know), the fact remains that the Latin left, especially of the Commie variety, especially of the pro-Soviet Commie variety at the height of the Cold War, were and are not very nice people.  If you don't believe that, I'll invite you to move to Cuba.  Since they'll put you up in the relative luxury accomodations reserved for Useful Idiots, you should subsequently renounce your European citizenships and get yourself arrested for a real representative taste.  I'm sure you'll love it.  They have nice weather and excellent cigars!

Edit:  Addendum:  Latin politics is not good guys and bad guys, it's generally bad guys and worse guys.  Pinochet was very bad but far better than what would have happened otherwise.  Perhaps saying the coup was a "positive event" was a bit too breezy, more like a non-negative event.

This only demonstrates your utterly ignorance about Latin-American politics. And that you're nothing but an imbecile. Who else was a commie, Goulart? Well, If those 'commies' had won, there would be the rising of a rural middle-class, which would avoid heavy rural flight at the 70's (probably the most important influence on southern-american underdevelopment on the following decades) and foment national industry, making an inner force for autonomous development. That was the whole matter. There, here or in Argentina, the Andes, anywhere in the region. Lula's success is only and entirely based on a new version of this reading. We would all have achieved 4 decades earlier what Brazil is achieving now, alone.
Let me tell you something, that being an imbecile you surely have no clue. These countries were not a Caribbean island run by US controlled mobsters. Even if TEH KOMMIUNIEESTZ had reached power and installed a soviet regime (something that only someone completely ignorant about what was the Latin-american 60's and 70's left or even the hardcore left would imagine. And don't come with Cuba, Castro wasn't even a commie before the USA positioned itself against him neither Cuba was a mess before the eastern block debacle - It was actually the Latin-american country with the best achievements, around that time) China would be the comparison. The soviets were less interested in such a development than the USA.

The struggle wasn't between 'commies' and 'non-commies'. It was between autonomists who assumed this position based on emancipation leanings (the main 'commie' speech was that we were never really independent / free) and an ancient elite whose power was based on being the foremen of great powers interests. It wasn't about central planning. It was about anti-imperialism.
We're talking here about people whose economical interest (poor people interested physicians, inner market oriented farmers, urban middle class professionals) was the existence of autochtonous populations with consumer's power. There are few things more imbecilic than the double-standard a-historical a-geographical bullsh**t you'd written.
Sure, if you believe that the sake of international capital based economy (which is conceptually linked to imperialist control, always - and I don't really care about what you think about the term 'imperialism', It is a historically based and valid geopolitical concept) is above anything else, than I must agree that a good guys/bad guys debate is pointless here. But to anyone who believes on humanism, people's empowerment and emancipation, democratic control of your own future and other political concepts which are important to non-imbecils, than, pal, It was a good guys / bad guys opposition. And those 'commies' were the good guys. They were the ones making the defence of freedom around.

The most amusing thing here is the undying tentative of putting the blame on those who were taken from democratically chosen positions. Even after debate over debate (on academical conditions, surely - I really don't care about what hacks have to say) demonstrates It's pure feces. This only sickens me. "Allende would make a self-coup! Goulart would make a self-coup!". F**k!!! How people are imbeciloid enough to not laugh on this!
What if Allende nationalized the whole freaking economy?? He was elected to do It, imbecile. Presidentialism is not parliamentarism. Any impeachment based on opposition to these policies are just grotesquely antidemocratic. Once democratic institutions are preserved and people can overturn what was done (which is something, alas, that our neoliberal fake-democracies are unable to provide, vide Greece), I'm sorry to inform, this is democracy. The rule from the people, by the people and to the people.

The second most amusing thing (and It always tells a lot to me) is that every time I read/listen to this specific bullsh**t - Chilean 73's coup - the round's coup defender is always a self proclaimed 'libertarian'. This only demonstrates how fake are the great share of these 'freedomers'. It's clearly not about freedom, It's about economics. That same brand of imbeciles defends another islander dictatorship as the quintessential model for society's organization.

Anyway, don't bother answering this. Any imbecile defender of Pinochet's coup is automatically on my ignore list. And, to the other guys, sorry about the rant. I just cannot stay calm on the whole matter of the XXth century's second half Latin-american dictatorship cycle. Personal matter.

All-Star Poster.  A-List.  Sex Icon.   A+++++ would buy again.

[© tweed]

Pinochet of course but I write in Hitler

[© tweed]

This thread should be locked. The entire thread in general and the last few pages in particular have once again made it clear that this thread only serves the purpose of group bullying: Find the best way to collectively mock a point of view you disagree with. This thread adds nothing to the quality of this forum, it actually hurts the Atlas Forum because it encourages very severe flame wars. This thread should be locked.

Inkist alert

[© tweed]

...Goddammit, guys, could we not do this?  This thread is |------| close to being relocked.  I really don't want to have to go through every one of your posts and edit out the offending quotes, because Atlas has been slow as s**t the last few days and it'd probably take a good 15 minutes, so could we just pretend this didn't happen and move on, or are you really going to make me edit every post that quoted this crap?

can you moralists and autocrats just butt out?  we're doing perfectly fine here.  if you don't enjoy this do something else with your time.